No, it is not, but not because of the placement of the comma or "therefore." The reason that that sentence is incorrect is because it is a run-on sentence (more specifically, a comma-splice).
To make it correct, you must insert a conjunction to join the two independent clauses ("Mary had a little lamb" and "therefore she was a pet owner"):
"Mary had a little lamb, so therefore she was a pet owner." "Mary had a little lamb, and therefore she was a pet owner."
etc.
Or, if you want, you can keep the clauses independent and make them their own sentences:
"Mary had a little lamb. Therefore she was a pet owner." "Mary had a little lamb. Therefore, she was a pet owner."
Any of those sentences are correct. Whichever one you choose depends on your preference. :)
Comments 6
Reply
Reply
Would you say that the following sentence was correct or incorrect?
Mary had a little lamb, therefore she was a pet owner.
Thanks.
Reply
No, it is not, but not because of the placement of the comma or "therefore." The reason that that sentence is incorrect is because it is a run-on sentence (more specifically, a comma-splice).
To make it correct, you must insert a conjunction to join the two independent clauses ("Mary had a little lamb" and "therefore she was a pet owner"):
"Mary had a little lamb, so therefore she was a pet owner."
"Mary had a little lamb, and therefore she was a pet owner."
etc.
Or, if you want, you can keep the clauses independent and make them their own sentences:
"Mary had a little lamb. Therefore she was a pet owner."
"Mary had a little lamb. Therefore, she was a pet owner."
Any of those sentences are correct. Whichever one you choose depends on your preference. :)
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment